TrustSys: Trusted Decision Making Scheme for Collaborative Artificial Intelligence of Things
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many IoT-based applications have inherited the artificial intelligence of things (AIoT) techniques to explore new services and benefits of smart recording and monitoring generated information. However, hundreds of hacking incidents caused by highly sophisticated attackers have generated serious risks, where they compromised various IoT sensors for their benefits, impeding the growth of AIoT. Various security schemes have been proposed in the literature; however, it is critical to determine the legitimacy of AIoT devices in real-time scenarios during the initial deployment of the network. Therefore, this article aims to provide a secure, reliable, and trusted decision-making scheme using multiattribute methods in collaborative AIoT. The proposed system uses backpropagation and Bayesian’s rule to ensure a fast and accurate decision. In addition, agent-based modeling and population-based modeling trust schemes are used to compute the legitimacy of the communicating model. Further, the proposed system is validated over various security measures against the various decision-based conventional methods such as Fuzzy c-means, REPTree, and random tree in terms of time, accuracy, replay attack, data falsification attack, recall, region of convergence, and F-Measure. The proposed mechanism achieves 93% improvement over accuracy and attack identification against existing mechanisms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".